Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this paper I investigate the function of the references to insects in Willem Anker's debut novel Siegfried (2007) from a cultural entomological perspective. My focus is on the character Wilhelm (Willem) Smit. Smit, a failed writer, gains his entomological knowledge from the books on insects that were left behind by the previous tenant of the house he rents on the farm of Jan Landman and his mentally disabled son Siegfried Landman. His engagement with insects goes beyond a scientific interest: he compares people and human society to insects and has a habit of eating insects. It therefore falls in the realm of cultural entomology. Since cultural entomology deals with the relationship between humans and insects, I furthermore tie my discussion to the field of Human-Animal Studies (HAS) in which the intertwinement of human and non-human animals is explored. I analyse the following three aspects in Siegfried: Smit's entomophagy (the eating of insects), Smit's general musings on the connection between humans and insects, and the comparison of the homeless people of Cape Town to insects in the novel. I investigate whether the portrayal of insect and human interaction is indicative of a posthuman interweavement or not. My conclusion is that Smit's consumption of insects is an act of desperation rather than a liberating intertwinement of human and animal. The comparison of humans to insects mainly relates to the negative perception of insects in Western culture and does not point to a posthuman transformation of human and animal.

Willem Anker's debut novel, Siegfried, deals with the experiences of the eponymous character, who is mentally disabled and whose hands and feet are webbed. In this article, an attempt is made to investigate how the theories of Deleuze and Guattari, as well as object oriented ontologies, can be used to argue that the representation of the character of Siegfried involves a blurring of the boundaries between the human and the nonhuman. The second aim of this article is to establish whether such a blurring is ethically problematic, given the cruel ways in which people considered less human than others are often treated. Where the first aim is concerned, it is argued that Siegfried's interaction with the world challenges hegemonic ideas of human subjectivity, especially ideas of what constitutes normal humanity. In the character of Siegfried traces are found of what can be described, in Deleuze and Guattari's terms, as becomings. These becomings serve as lines of fight from blocked forms of human subjectivity. The boundaries between what is considered human and what is considered nonhuman are therefore indeed blurred. Concerning the second aim, it is argued that the novel can be read as a critique of the ways in which society treats disabled people, and that it can therefore be brought into dialogue with disability studies. The potential for object oriented ontologies to be apolitical (and even unethical, in this respect), is countered in the analysis of the novel by disability studies' activism and social commentary. Keywords: becoming animal, Deleuze and Guattari, disability studies, object oriented ontologies, Siegfried, Willem Anker.

Willem Anker has been accused of stealing from Cormac McCarthy’s Blood Meridian (1985) in his novel Red Dog (2018), the English translation of his award-winning Buys (2014). I defend Anker on the charge of plagiarism, while conceding that his novel could not have been the book that it is without the precedent of Blood Meridian. I go on to voice other reservations about Red Dog via discussion, inter alia, of Anker’s characterisation of Coenraad Buys and the rendering in English of his Afrikaans original. I conclude that the historical Coenraad Buys appears intractable to novelistic treatment, and that Anker signals his awareness of this while at the same time making a valiant attempt to bring the character to life.

Willem Anker’s debut novel, Siegfried, deals with the experiences of the eponymous character, who is mentally disabled and whose hands and feet are webbed. In this article, an attempt is made to investigate how the theories of Deleuze and Guattari, as well as object oriented ontologies, can be used to argue that the representation of the character of Siegfried involves a blurring of the boundaries between the human and the nonhuman. The second aim of this article is to establish whether such a blurring is ethically problematic, given the cruel ways in which people considered less human than others are often treated. Where the first aim is concerned, it is argued that Siegfried’s interaction with the world challenges hegemonic ideas of human subjectivity, especially ideas of what constitutes normal humanity. In the character of Siegfried traces are found of what can be described, in Deleuze and Guattari’s terms, as becomings. These becomings serve as lines of flight from blocked forms of human subjectivity. The boundaries between what is considered human and what is considered nonhuman are therefore indeed blurred. Concerning the second aim, it is argued that the novel can be read as a critique of the ways in which society treats disabled people, and that it can therefore be brought into dialogue with disability studies. The potential for object oriented ontologies to be apolitical (and even unethical, in this respect), is countered in the analysis of the novel by disability studies’ activism and social commentary. 

Willem Anker’s debut novel, Siegfried, deals with the experiences of the eponymous character, who is mentally disabled and whose hands and feet are webbed. In this article, an attempt is made to investigate how the theories of Deleuze and Guattari, as well as object oriented ontologies, can be used to argue that the representation of the character of Siegfried involves a blurring of the boundaries between the human and the nonhuman. The second aim of this article is to establish whether such a blurring is ethically problematic, given the cruel ways in which people considered less human than others are often treated. Where the first aim is concerned, it is argued that Siegfried’s interaction with the world challenges hegemonic ideas of human subjectivity, especially ideas of what constitutes normal humanity. In the character of Siegfried traces are found of what can be described, in Deleuze and Guattari’s terms, as becomings. These becomings serve as lines of flight from blocked forms of human subjectivity. The boundaries between what is considered human and what is considered nonhuman are therefore indeed blurred. Concerning the second aim, it is argued that the novel can be read as a critique of the ways in which society treats disabled people, and that it can therefore be brought into dialogue with disability studies. The potential for object oriented ontologies to be apolitical (and even unethical, in this respect), is countered in the analysis of the novel by disability studies’ activism and social commentary

In this paper I investigate the function of the references to insects in Willem Anker's debut novel Siegfried (2007) from a cultural entomological perspective. My focus is on the character Wilhelm (Willem) Smit. Smit, a failed writer, gains his entomological knowledge from the books on insects that was left behind by the previous tenant of the house he rents on the farm of Jan Landman and his mentally disabled son Siegfried Landman. His engagement with insects goes beyond a scientific interest: he compares people and human society to insects and has a habit of eating insects. It therefore falls in the realm of cultural entomology. Since cultural entomology deals with the relationship between humans and insects, I furthermore tie my discussion to the field of Human-Animal Studies (HAS) in which the intertwinement of human and non-human animals is explored. I analyse the following three aspects in Siegfried: Smit's entomophagy (the eating of insects), Smit's general musings on the connection between humans and insects, and the comparison of the homeless people of Cape Town to insects in the novel. I investigate whether the portrayal of insect and human interaction is indicative of a posthuman interweavement or not. My conclusion is that Smit's consumption of insects is an act of desperation rather than a liberating intertwinement of human and animal. The comparison of humans to insects mainly relates to the negative perception of insects in Western culture and does not point to a posthuman transformation of human and animal.

A cultural entomological investigation of insects in Willem Anker’s Siegfried In this paper I investigate the function of the references to insects in Willem Anker’s debut novel Siegfried (2007) from a cultural entomological perspective. My focus is on the character Wilhelm (Willem) Smit. Smit, a failed writer, gains his entomological knowledge from the books on insects that were left behind by the previous tenant of the house he rents on the farm of Jan Landman and his mentally disabled son Siegfried Landman. His engagement with insects goes beyond a scientific interest: he compares people and human society to insects and has a habit of eating insects. It therefore falls in the realm of cultural entomology. Since cultural entomology deals with the relationship between humans and insects, I furthermore tie my discussion to the field of Human-Animal Studies (HAS) in which the intertwinement of human and non-human animals is explored. I analyse the following three aspects in Siegfried: Smit’s entomophagy (the eating of insects), Smit’s general musings on the connection between humans and insects, and the comparison of the homeless people of Cape Town to insects in the novel. I investigate whether the portrayal of insect and human interaction is indicative of a posthuman interweavement or not. My conclusion is that Smit’s consumption of insects is an act of desperation rather than a liberating intertwinement of human and animal. The comparison of humans to insects mainly relates to the negative perception of insects in Western culture and does not point to a posthuman transformation of human and animal.